PreprintCited by 88Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology

Oscillatory behavior of two nonlinear microbial models of soil carbon decomposition

Open access
Wang, Y. P., Chen, B. C., Wieder, W. R., Luo, Y. Q., Leite, M., Medlyn, B. E., Rasmussen, M., Smith, M. J. +2 more·2013·Biogeosciences

Abstract

Abstract. A number of nonlinear models have recently been proposed for simulating soil carbon decomposition. Their predictions of soil carbon responses to fresh litter input and warming differ significantly from conventional linear models. Using both stability analysis and numerical simulations, we showed that two of those nonlinear models (a two-pool model and a three-pool model) exhibit damped oscillatory responses to small perturbations. Stability analysis showed the frequency of oscillation is proportional to √ (ϵ −1−1)Ks/Vs in the two-pool model, and to √ (ϵ −1−1)Kl/Vl in the three-pool model, where ϵ is microbial growth efficiency, Ks and Kl are the half saturation constants of soil and litter carbon, respectively, and Vs and Vl are the maximal rates of carbon decomposition per unit of microbial biomass for soil and litter carbon, respectively. For both models, the oscillation has a period between 5 and 15 yr depending on other parameter values, and has smaller amplitude at soil temperatures between 0 °C to 15 °C. In addition, the equilibrium pool sizes of litter or soil carbon are insensitive to carbon inputs in the nonlinear model, but are proportional to carbon input in the conventional linear model. Under warming, the microbial biomass and litter carbon pools simulated by the nonlinear models can increase or decrease, depending whether ϵ varies with temperature. In contrast, the conventional linear models always simulate a decrease in both microbial and litter carbon pools with warming. Based on the evidence available, we concluded that the oscillatory behavior and insensitivity of soil carbon to carbon input in the nonlinear models are unrealistic. We recommend that a better model for capturing the soil carbon dynamics over decadal to centennial timescales would combine the sensitivity of the conventional models to carbon influx with the flexible response to warming of the nonlinear model.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5194/bgd-10-19661-2013

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Including microbial biomass as an additional pool in the dynamical system leads to unrealistic nonlinear behaviour not supported by the authors' own observations.

    “Notice that we do not represent the microbial biomass as an additional pool in our dynamical system because it leads to unrealistic nonlinear behaviour 64 not supported by our own observations.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 50 · Cited by 88

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Nadelhoffer, K. J., Boone, R. D., Bowden, R. D., Canary, J., Kaye, P., Micks, A., Ricca, J. A., Aitkenhead, K., Lajtha, K., and Mc- Dowell, W. H.: The DIRT Experiment: Litter and Root Influences on Forest Soil Organic Matter Stocks and Function, in: Forests in time: the environmental consequences of 1000 years of change in New England, edietd by: Foster, D. and Aber, J., New Haven, Yale University Press, 2004.

Authors
Wang, Y. P., Chen, B. C., Wieder, W. R., Luo, Y. Q., Leite, M., Medlyn, B. E., Rasmussen, M., Smith, M. J., Agusto, F. B., & Hoffman, F.
Affiliations
  • CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere (AU)
  • NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US)
  • University of Oklahoma (US)
  • University of Toledo (US)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Microsoft Research (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Austin Peay State University (US)
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory (US)
Venue
Biogeosciences
Published
2013-12-16
Volume
11
Issue
7
Pages
1817-1831
ISSN
1726-4170 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158928879
Cited by
88
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6
FWCI
12.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biogeosciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (EF-0832-858, 0832858)
  • U.S. Department of Homeland Security (EF-0832858)
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (EF-0832858)
  • National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (EF-0832858)
  • University of Tennessee, Knoxville (EF-0832858)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/I004165/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Peatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Keywords
soil carbon decomposition, oscillatory dynamics, two-pool model, three-pool model, microbial biomass, litter carbon, warming effects, half-saturation constant, microbial growth efficiency, soil carbon dynamics, global warming

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review